You Think You Don’t Kill Animals Because You Don’t Eat Meat? Wrong, Says Argentinian Naturalist

Think Kill Animals Because Don’t Eat Meat

Among vegans and vegetarians, there are those who choose to do so simply because they prefer it – they do not like to eat meat.

And that’s perfectly fine. However, a lot more people who will say that they are on such a diet decided to stop eating meat for the love of animals, compassion, and in order to stop the killing.

This second group might be wrong and their reasoning is less logical. It may sound contradictory, to say the least, but not only that they participate in the killing of animals just like omnivores do, they might even harm animal life more than the meat eaters.

At least, that’s what claims Claudio Bertonatti, one of the most famous Argentinian naturalists, people who have dedicated their lives to nature. In his article “The vegan misconceptions” he warned the readers why by eating vegetables you still support the killing of animals. This drew the anger of thousands of vegans and vegetarians but also their colleagues who deal with environmental protection.

However, if you listen to his arguments carefully, you must admit that they make some sense.

“I was an ardent vegetarian. As a teenager, I grew up in connection and love for nature. I thought I could avoid killing many animals if I become a vegetarian. Later, I studied that topic a little better, I went into the wilderness and studied the local vegetable-animal world and then I changed my mind, ” explains Bertonatti in an interview for

“I went to the country to study the wildlife. I realized that in the fields of wheat there are no birds, and those few that are found there are persecuted by farmers. As a vegetarian, I actually influenced the less killing of domestic animals, not the wild ones.”

“In Argentina, many think they are fighting for the animals if they do not eat meat or wear leather clothes. They think, if there were more vegetarians in the world, fewer animals will be killed. This is not true. From the moment humans began to cultivate cereals and work in the fields, it has already made an impact on nature and especially the wildlife.

There are no animal species that are not connected to the system, the survival of some depends on death, whether directly or indirectly. I understand that this knowledge can be painful. I’d like to live in an ideal world,” he explains.

“When I say this, many feel under attack. Rice, corn, pastry … most vegetarians eat it. The first impact of such foods production is the loss of forests. We are forcing nature to make room for crops. Many rainforests around the globe disappeared due to wheat and corn fields. And we continue destroying the nature by preventing the birds to feed. Many farmers use poisons against these birds.

For other animals, they put electric fences or scare them away with guns. So, if you eat meat, you participate in killing animals. But if you eat vegetables, again you participate in the killing of animals. But this time, you are helping in killing the wild animals,” says Bertonatti.

Should vegans abandon their diet because they can’t possibly cause zero animal deaths? From his PlayGround interview, it appears that renowned’ Argentine naturalist Claudio Bertonatti thinks they should.

Watch this really interesting video:


So what are your thoughts on this? Do Bertonatti’s statements make any sense to you?

I personally think he needs to do some more research!


By Apollonas K.

Copyright © 2017 Life Advancer. All rights reserved. For permission to reprint, contact us.
By | 2017-08-19T23:12:24+00:00 January 24th, 2017|Categories: Animals, Food and Nutrition, Lifestyle|Tags: , , , , , |


  1. Farmer K Natural January 25, 2017 at 1:12 am - Reply

    A lot of that food production and deforestation is specifically to feed the animals that will feed humans. Why not just eat the crops and let those animals live? Grow your own food Mkay?

  2. Nathalie Felëus January 25, 2017 at 1:25 am - Reply

    Watch this and you understand that eating meat is even a way to save the earth 🙂

  3. Joanne Collinson January 25, 2017 at 2:05 am - Reply

    wrong……we grow tonnes more grain to feed the animals we eat so for those wild animals that may lose their habitat things would not change. less domestic animals would exist if we didn’t breed them for food freeing up thousands of acres of land.

  4. Ron Sharoni January 25, 2017 at 2:35 am - Reply

    Exactly like Carol says, no one thinking you can live without hurting anyone we are trying to minimize the impact and there is no question it will work.

  5. Carol Elizabeth Gough January 25, 2017 at 2:42 am - Reply

    His argument is invalid. His reasoning is faulty. The amount of forest razed to grow enough grain to feed factory farmed animals is many times more than what is required to feed a vegan populace. Water, fossil fuels, pesticide runoff are also 4-8 times greater than would be expended for vegan needs. 8 times as many fossil fuels, 4 times as much water, etc. are required to produce animal protein.

  6. Life Advancer January 25, 2017 at 8:47 am - Reply

    Hello everyone,

    I’m really sorry that so many people think we are trying to promote a specific idea or something. Our purpose is just to bring a topic for discussion and give some food for thought, that’s all.
    As the first lines of the article stated:

    “Among vegans and vegetarians, there are those who choose to do so simply because they prefer it – they do not like to eat meat.

    And that’s perfectly fine!!!!!!”

    We don’t have any kind of problem with vegans or meat eaters. Everyone is free to eat whatever he/she wants. Before you start to blame a whole website, please keep in mind that a specific article might just be the personal opinion of the author.

  7. Joel Feodiyoup January 25, 2017 at 6:04 am - Reply

    What are the cows fed? Grain. For years. To provide a few meals. If that grain is used to feed people instead of cows, then it feeds a lot more people. A vegetarian diet results in less death than a meat eating diet. Really, how can someone write an article about this and not have done the research to take into account that meat producers rely on massive volumes of grain to produce the meat, making the whole point of the article invalid?

    • Lyubomir Ivanov January 25, 2017 at 6:49 am - Reply

      You conveniently forget one important detail, however – animals utilize plant food better than humans. It is more efficient and environment-friendly to feed the grain to animals than to eat it directly. In exchange, animals give us more protein, more energy and more vital nutrients.

    • Malati Devi Dasi January 25, 2017 at 7:18 am - Reply

      Lyubomir Ivanov So 1 kg of beef is more nutitious than 25 – 50 kgs of grains needed to grow it? LOL!!!

    • Joel Feodiyoup January 25, 2017 at 11:10 am - Reply

      Lyubomir Ivanov I’m not an expert on how efficient different animals are at utilizing food. But think about this: for how many years was that cow fed grain until it reached the age where it could be slaughtered for human food? When you consume that meat, all those years of feeding the animal grain also was necessary. Even if the animal is slightly more efficient at utilizing the grain, it can’t compare to the alternative which is to just feed the grain directly to humans. All those years of grain go to feed humans, or we still farm all of that grain, except we just end up with one animal worth of food. They both use the same amount of grain, but the vegetarian option feeds far more people.

    • Mesfin Hailemariam January 25, 2017 at 11:36 pm - Reply

    • Miguel Sanchez January 31, 2017 at 6:39 am - Reply

      MH … This chart or meme or whatever it is is misleading in that the percentages are along different scales.

    • Miguel Sanchez January 31, 2017 at 6:43 am - Reply

      Here we go…

      My guess is that someone made this chart by combining data from a chart about vegetables and a chart about meat. Each of the two charts that got combined was true, but they were measuring protein content two different ways. The combined chart is wrong, because it shows the two different measurements like they’re the same thing, which they aren’t. The person who combined the two charts didn’t read them very carefully, or maybe found the charts without any information explaining them and didn’t realize they were different.

      The vegetables measure protein as a percentage of total calories.
      100 grams of spinach has 23 calories:
      .4 grams of fat (3.6 calories – fat is 9 calories per gram)
      1.9 grams of sugar (7.8 calories – sugar and protein are 4 calories per gram)
      2.9 grams of protein (11.6 calories)
      So of the 23 calories, 11.6 are from protein. That’s 50%, about what’s in the chart.

      The meats measure protein as a percentage of total weight.
      100 grams of chicken has 161 calories:
      9 grams of fat (81 calories)
      0 grams of carbohydrate (0 calories)
      20 grams of protein (80 calories)
      So of the 100 grams, 20 are from protein. That 20% is close to the 23% in the chart.

      To make a true chart that actually compared vegetables and meat, we would need to measure protein in vegetables and meats the same way.

      Both measurements by calories:
      Spinach: 11.6 calories out of 23 calories = 50% protein
      Chicken: 80 calories out of 161 calories = 50% protein

      Both measurements by weight:
      Spinach: 2.9 grams out of 100 = 3% protein
      Chicken: 20 grams out of 100 = 20% protein

      So spinach and chicken both give you about the same amount of protein per calorie, but there’s a lot fewer calories in spinach. As NJ mentioned, vegetables are mostly water. So you have to eat way more vegetables to get a specific amount of protein.

      You would need to eat 2 kilograms of spinach (4 pounds) a day to get all your daily protein from it. I would not enjoy that at all. 🙂

    • Joel Feodiyoup January 31, 2017 at 7:08 am - Reply

      Miguel Sanchez I rode a bicycle across Europe last year. I survived on loaves of bread and fruit/vegetables, and pasta. I didn’t eat any meat. I crossed the alps twice. By the end I felt very strong. Better than at the beginning. How did I get enough protein, given that I paid no attention to protein intake (or any nutrients)? I don’t say that to brag. Others have completed more impressive cycling trips. But I don’t understand how people can say that vegetarians/vegans must struggle to get enough protein, given that there are plenty of vegetarians/vegans doing perfectly alright. Did you know that too much protein has been linked to cancer? But supermarkets sell foods artificially crammed with huge quantities of protein.

    • Teri White January 31, 2017 at 9:25 am - Reply

      Malati Devi Dasi Grain isn’t very good for us, turns out.

    • Georgi Ivanov January 31, 2017 at 10:19 pm - Reply

      Are you taking to account the fuc*ing land that we need to feed 7 billion of people AND much more animals? Much smarter people than you and me thought of this idea already, but why isn’t it implemented yet, because you are going to either starve humans or either starve animals. Just think of it. Around 37% of the world’s land was considered agricultural land. “Christian Peters informs us that “a person following a low-fat vegetarian diet, for example, will need less than half (0.44) an acre per person per year to produce their food”

      “Surprisingly, however, a vegetarian diet is not necessarily the most efficient in terms of land use” he continues

      The reason is simple – fruits, vegetables, and grains must be grown on high-quality arable cropland. Livestock based foods (such as meat and dairy products from ruminant animals) are supported by lower quality, and far more widely available, lands that are only capable of supporting pastures.

      So, based on the last set of global census data (2008) we would require 3,068,444,911 acres of arable land. At that time, the global population was 6 billion and if a global one-child program had been enacted, the ~3,212,369,959 of arable land that was globally available may very well have sufficed.

      Not including the figures for degraded land, Earth is currently losing, due to a range of factors, arable land at the conservative rate of 1% a year. Thus, a more accurate current figure is far closer to that of 3,024,382,549 acres.

      However … we now have a global population that has already crossed the 7,000,000,000 mark, thus the number of arable acres required is far closer to 3,080,000,000 – or put another way, Earth now has a shortfall of ~55,617,451 acres … and rising. In short, we have passed “peak land” and our growing population requires far more arable land than we currently have available to provide the nutrition required for all of those people in a vegan form.

      As iterated, livestock is supported by lower quality (but far more widely available) land that can support pasture and hay. Thus, any claim that presumes we could simply remove the livestock and start growing vegetable or crop-based foods on the existing farm land is flawed.”

    • Cyd Pom Pom February 1, 2017 at 11:46 am - Reply

      Lyubomir Ivanov You really believe that? You just made that up. It does not even stand up to casual acknowledgement let alone scrutiny. If you r point was the case we could be able to magicly double the calories available by passing them through a cow. Twerp!

  8. Thanasis Athanasakos January 25, 2017 at 1:20 pm - Reply

    I think we still have democracy, so everyone is free to eat whatever he wants! Also everyone is free to think and say his opinion, some of you are overreacting to this article!

  9. Rachel Gerstner January 25, 2017 at 1:59 pm - Reply

    Here we go again with this nonsense from an obvious meat eater and not a vegan. Bought and paid by the meat industry, enjoy your propaganda folks. We all know that most of these farms are used for animal agriculture. Stop with the bs.

    • Dane Maxwell January 26, 2017 at 7:05 am - Reply

      Rachael I agree with you 100% This article is absolute nonsense and 100% Fodder/Shite!

  10. Akshay Junghare January 25, 2017 at 2:09 pm - Reply

    This argument is only partially correct. For growing meat & other nonveg lots of vegetarian food is consumed which could be directly consumed by people also. Only these creatures are grown for our sake. Dosen’t that harm the ecosystem?

  11. Paul Grocock January 30, 2017 at 1:23 am - Reply

    Rubbish, eating game and wild animals maybe. But domestic animals consume vast volumes of grown plant food just to produce meat.

  12. Dave Burgess January 30, 2017 at 7:12 am - Reply

    Twisted logic from a moron

  13. Stella Rios Shehi January 30, 2017 at 10:51 am - Reply

    Are you kidding me with this article? Our planet loses acres and acres of rainforest daily to create grazing pastures for cows!

  14. Christopher Pacheco January 30, 2017 at 10:52 am - Reply

    Your logic is flawed. The grains grown to feed animals are exponentially more than what humans consume. If you eat factory farmed meat, that meat has consumed 10x the energy (through grains). So if grains are the problem your doing exponentially more damage and consuming far more grains by eating meat. This is a stupid article and I’m not even a vegan.

  15. Kim Jackson January 30, 2017 at 1:11 pm - Reply

    I do understand this concept. However, the one fact this author neglects to mention is the majority of land that has caused deforestation is actually used to grow feed for animals and is not for human consumption…it’s a fact.

  16. Carol Schwers January 30, 2017 at 2:55 pm - Reply

    This is so flawed. You do not destroy the rainforest to make room for agricultural crops. Crop farming uses a fraction of land that animal factory farming does. This guy is an idiot. It’s animal agriculture that uses up all the land and pollutes the atmosphere, lakes, rivers and streams with animal waste and gases.

  17. Colin Phillips January 30, 2017 at 4:25 pm - Reply

    I am not a vegetarian or a vegan ..I have no problem with people who want to be for whatever reason …but anyone will know that to grow any vegetable matter in your back yard or in a field you have to feed ..the food is either organic waste or chemicals ..right?

    Already vast swathes of land across America and the rest of the world have turned into dust bowles making the earth baron because of continuous use of chemical fertilizers…. this doesn’t happen if you use organic waste. muck from animal farms is spread every year least here in Britain. But still, too many chemicals are used to deal with the amount of growth. So many by-products of an animal is used daily from soap and washing and cleaning materials foods etc ..I don’t want vast chemical plants vomiting out waste into the atmosphere either ..seems that the problem might be just too many people on the planet and we need to eat much less ,meat and create less waste in our homes .

  18. Ross Quinn January 30, 2017 at 4:47 pm - Reply

    Vertical Farming… problem solved, no need to kill anything.

  19. Carol Elizabeth Gough January 30, 2017 at 4:53 pm - Reply

    If the articles are posted to encourage discussion, they have succeeded. Is that not what we’re doing? Why are people getting so upset? We are all entitled to our opinions, however misguided they may be. I think I was prompted to comment mostly because I was disappointed that a fellow Argentine could be so close-minded. Also, the headline was very confrontational.

  20. Italia Millán January 31, 2017 at 12:42 am - Reply

    “Ranching-induced deforestation is one of the main causes of loss of some unique plant and animal species in the tropical rainforests of Central and South America as well as carbon release in the atmosphere,” said Henning Steinfeld, Chief of the FAO Livestock Information, Sector Analysis and Policy Branch.

  21. Italia Millán January 31, 2017 at 12:45 am - Reply

    “Diets rich in beef and other red meat can be bad for a person’s health. And the practice is equally bad for Earth’s biodiversity, according to a team of scientists who have fingered human carnivory—and its impact on land use—as the single biggest threat to much of the world’s flora and fauna.”

  22. Italia Millán January 31, 2017 at 12:54 am - Reply

    “Producing crops (soy, corn, wheat, etc.) for animal feed is many times more resource-intensive than using crops for direct human consumption. While there are perilous trade-offs related to fuel vs. food, a more serious concern for a variety of reasons is feed vs. food.

    With 75% of all agricultural land used for animal production—and more than a third of global calories and half of global protein inefficiently used as animal feed —the impact of increasing global meat consumption is monumental.”

  23. Peter Webb January 31, 2017 at 6:52 am - Reply

    I see a fundamental misunderstanding of the livestock industry by many of those commenting here. It is that grain is the normal and necessary food of domestic animals.

    The reality is that the natural food of cattle and sheep is grass. On my property, every single sheep is eating grass. Over 90% of the sheep and cattle in Australia are pastured on grass, and the pastures that they graze are far more diverse and contain far more native species (both plant and animal) than grain fields in the same landscape.

    What the critics further ignore, is that animals can eat a great deal of plant material that humans cannot….. and farmers simply cannot grow 100% human-quality food the whole time.
    A spell of bad weather at harvest and the wheat that would have made your pasta or bread, is spoiled. If we cannot feed it to livestock, it must be wasted.
    The oil that you use in your salad and cooking is only a fraction of the plant that is grown to produce it. The straw and protein meal that remain are valuable by-products if fed to animals, but are wasted if they cannot be used for that purpose.
    We must rotate crops if we are to combat disease without using excessive chemicals, but not all alternative crops are something that you would want to eat.
    Pasture is actually the most sustainable and fertility-budding regime for soil…. growing vegetables or crops requires more tillage, more energy, more diesel and produces more erosion…… but you can’t eat it.

    Don’t talk about “research” without doing it yourself.

  24. Vince Mulvena January 31, 2017 at 9:50 am - Reply

    Why kill animals, just go to the supermarket a buy it , like most others do.

  25. Nicholas Bruce January 31, 2017 at 10:33 am - Reply


  26. Michelle Musgrave January 31, 2017 at 10:33 am - Reply

    Ooooo I don’t think so

  27. Anki Øde January 31, 2017 at 10:38 am - Reply


  28. Aleksandra J. Kulczycka January 31, 2017 at 10:41 am - Reply

    The dumbest argument EVER! Last time I checked I ate far less grain than a cow

  29. Sahil Bakshi January 31, 2017 at 10:41 am - Reply

    He is a moron.

  30. Lindsay Linz Bray January 31, 2017 at 1:45 pm - Reply

    Most obvious case of pseudoscience I’ve read. Author claims to be a naturalist, but the inaccuracies and assumptions in the article are frankly laughable. Where are the ratios of crops grown for livestock consumption, versus those grown for human consumption? Where are the studies that suggest this? Where’s the research?

    The whole article reads like the ramblings of a guilty conscience, trying to deflect that guilt by accusing vegetarians and vegans of a non-existent bigger crime. It sounds like the kinds of things my guilt-ridden mind would come out with when I was trying to defend eating meat while my conscience struggled with the guilt. Been veggie for nearly 8 months and those excuses (because that is what these are) were silenced immediately.

    Also, there are more reasons than ethics alone for being vegetarian or vegan. Health benefits being one such example. No mention of those in this article.

    We’re all free to choose whether or not to eat meat. If the author’s taste for meat outweighs his guilty conscience, I’m happy for him, but he has no right to try to guilt-trip others by accusing them of a larger (non-existent) “crime” without a sliver of evidence.

  31. Greg Fitzgerald January 31, 2017 at 10:46 am - Reply

    Suck eggs vegans…

  32. Kathryn Clarke January 31, 2017 at 11:02 am - Reply

    Sarah Sarah Hickey, fair point this fellow has, lucky, I can keep eating meat

  33. Emil Emilio Emiliano January 31, 2017 at 11:07 am - Reply

    It doesn’t really matter what we do since we are 2 many, wherever we go in nature we will disturb balance, because we are so unnaturally many. If we gonna keep be as many as we are, we need to find a way where we do not disturb the nature at all.

  34. Peter Mulligan January 31, 2017 at 11:09 am - Reply

    Interesting point of view but id say he was paid for it. If the amount of land used for rearing animals was used to grow crops instead the world would be abundant with food.

  35. Lisa Russo January 31, 2017 at 11:10 am - Reply

    This sounds like Trump logic

  36. David Muñoz Fernandez January 31, 2017 at 11:23 am - Reply

    oh no! i am falling in the dangerous way of my own nature!

  37. Kayla Johnson January 31, 2017 at 11:26 am - Reply

    lmfaooo noooo claudio bertonatti is a dumb ass

  38. Taijara A Lucas January 31, 2017 at 11:35 am - Reply

    He clearly missed the whole point! Try again “Mr Argentinian Naturalist”

  39. Kyle M Vires January 31, 2017 at 11:54 am - Reply

    It’s like saying we wouldn’t need oil if we all road our bikes to work… Retarded

  40. Mohammed Almallah January 31, 2017 at 11:55 am - Reply

    Sofía , Damn it , Both Ways Killing Animals

  41. Mike Davies January 31, 2017 at 12:03 pm - Reply

    So many triggered vegans lel

  42. Ness Caira January 31, 2017 at 12:10 pm - Reply

    not a very convincing argument..

  43. Mildred Reiniers January 31, 2017 at 12:41 pm - Reply

    Lots of vegetarians don’t eat meat out of protest how animals are reared and kept thought – not necessarily about the fact that they are killed.

  44. Jan Andres Villar January 31, 2017 at 12:43 pm - Reply

    What an idiot Who did this? If he wants many Kind of cancer or he likes to be sick is his problem not mine

  45. Jake Jackrabbit Bray January 31, 2017 at 3:48 pm - Reply

    The issue with sharing such an article is that you should also point out the invalid points with Claudio Bertonatti’s ‘research‘. It sounds like Claudio was sitting there and concluded such things with little consideration about how it all works. By sharing a foolish thought, can reflect on the quality of the articles you write.

    It can appear you’re regurgitating other people’s articles without analysis or considering what impacts such bias and misinformation articles can have.

  46. David Sárközi January 31, 2017 at 12:49 pm - Reply

    Carla Gina bammmmm stop killing my food

  47. Julia Kelly January 31, 2017 at 1:01 pm - Reply

    This article is nonsense. He is actually describing problems of factory farming. My question is, who funded this travesty?

  48. Angela Brown January 31, 2017 at 1:06 pm - Reply

    Takes 85% of our farmland to support livestock.

  49. Isa Maria Araujo January 31, 2017 at 1:11 pm - Reply

    Makes no sense at all.

  50. SuVasini Shakya January 31, 2017 at 1:16 pm - Reply

    There u go Shristi Shakya

  51. Vi Va January 31, 2017 at 1:19 pm - Reply

    Ok I get the argument but what is there left to eat? Either way people have to end up destroying the planet to some extent to survive…

  52. Vi Va January 31, 2017 at 1:29 pm - Reply

    No thanks. I’m decreasing as much destruction as I can.

  53. Jagadisvari Hales January 31, 2017 at 1:42 pm - Reply

    Killing an animal is murder! There is a soul in that animal body, just like a human!❤

  54. Claudio Postinghel January 31, 2017 at 1:43 pm - Reply

    You think you don’t kill dogs becouse you don’t eat dog meat? And so? Is this a reason for eat them? Obviously, if you kill dogs is not ethical kill dogs.

    Some people, like asians, think that eating dogs, horses and cows is ethical.
    Some people, like americans, think that eating dogs is not ethical, but eating horses and cows is ethical.
    Some people, like british people, think that eating dogs and horses is not ethical, but eating cows is ethical.
    Some people, like vegan, think think that eating dogs, horses and cows is not ethical.

  55. Brianna Brown January 31, 2017 at 1:56 pm - Reply

    Olivia Gould interesting perspective

  56. Reha Sharma January 31, 2017 at 2:01 pm - Reply


  57. Severin Johnson January 31, 2017 at 2:22 pm - Reply

    From whatever angle you see it… the real problem is still human overpopulation!

  58. Anita van Hussen January 31, 2017 at 2:41 pm - Reply

    I dont like meat, the taste cannibalism to me

  59. David M Hayden January 31, 2017 at 2:41 pm - Reply

    This guy is a fuckin idiot. He’s saying that most of Amazon deforestation is for wheat and corn, which is true. However, that wheat and corn goes to feed AGRICULTURE. Vegan and vegetarian impacts on the environment are exponentially less than that of a meat eater. Plus, I personally don’t want to consume the torture, misery, carnage, and absolute horror that factory farmed animals endure. No thanks.

  60. Gabriela Korenska January 31, 2017 at 2:44 pm - Reply

    Dumbest thing i have read :)))

  61. Amy Barbour January 31, 2017 at 2:54 pm - Reply

    Sure we just survive of air then……. lol

  62. Jordan Carvalho January 31, 2017 at 3:53 pm - Reply

    I know most argentinians eat beef and pork with every meal so it’s very hard to have this conversation.

  63. Robert Conroy January 31, 2017 at 4:12 pm - Reply

    No ancient culture was ever vegan, or vegetarian. This is a brand new P.E.T.A. thing. No vegan knows anything about nutrition. Vegan = EPA/DHA omega-3, vitamin D, and B12 deficiencies. Three of the worst deficiencies that hurt you and give you serious mental health problems.

  64. Sherif Errefae January 31, 2017 at 4:22 pm - Reply

    What do livestock animals grow on? GRAINS!! They feed them double the amount of grains needed to feed the entire humans! which results in a wider damaged forests, more wild animals killed, horrible amount of water 4 times as much water as the humans need.

  65. Anil Hemnath January 31, 2017 at 4:54 pm - Reply

    So then are we to continue eating meat? What nonsense

  66. Marianne Wessels January 31, 2017 at 4:57 pm - Reply

    Ok, i am convinced. I don’t want to hurt animals, so I am gonna eat meat again. Since i already eat vegetables and fruit and it harms animals, I should add in even more harm into my diet and eat animals flesh whos throats are slit. *sarcasm ends now*

  67. Magdalena Kachel January 31, 2017 at 5:21 pm - Reply

    What is wrong with people why we have enough to justify what we eat ?? Keeping balance fighting the smother houses and indore farms where injustice is done supporting local humain farmers. U can’t force and expect others to change to what you what them but you can educate them how to do it right away do in moderation and articulate is kind of bull and I do eat meat and meat products

  68. Louise Andréasson January 31, 2017 at 5:26 pm - Reply


  69. Hank Taylor January 31, 2017 at 5:32 pm - Reply

    Nonsense article and I’m not vegetarian

  70. Ralph Graham January 31, 2017 at 8:39 pm - Reply

    Such an old argument, a beat up, as useless as it was before it started getting copied around the world by people who manage to copy and paste but not to think.

    This is just one of a number of scornful articles written the author acts like s/he is confounding veganism/animal rights saying it is a sham, built on a lie, that we (vegans) are all hypocrites. This based on the idea that we don’t kill anything – we do, and that we claim we don’t- we do not.claim that. Just another hollow beat up.

    Animal lives are lost in the harvesting of crops and we are not about to start living on air. We willingly kill bacteria, tapeworms, termites and more.

    What we stand for is causing as little harm as possible to animal life and for each of us the exact boundary is going to be different and change over time.

    One ridiculous argument we get is that vegans would need more crops so more death would result. But, massive amounts of the crops grown are fed to animals to make meat so all that crop area could be used for humans. It also takes much less area to feed people from crops than it does to raise animals for food so that alone invalidates such claims.

    The opening statement. “Among vegans and vegetarians, there are those who choose to do so simply because they prefer it – they do not like to eat meat.”
    More fiction. Vegans are people who don’t eat animals (or use their products) because they hold that they have the right to live. The ugly assembly line of mass bred animals going to their death is totally unnecessary and is ruining the earth.

  71. Howard Smith January 31, 2017 at 5:52 pm - Reply

    It takes 70 billion animals to feed the 8 billion humans each year. These 70 billion animals take much more land to grow crops to feed these animals than humans. It is the main reason for deforestation and global warming if you believe in global warming. So I believe this guy is not correct in his assumptions.

  72. Glowacki Christopher January 31, 2017 at 6:08 pm - Reply

    Dianna Derigo what do you think?

  73. Peter Nolan January 31, 2017 at 6:15 pm - Reply

    Insightful viewpoint on vegan and vegetarian lifestyles.

  74. Zahra Noori January 31, 2017 at 6:32 pm - Reply

    Love you more

  75. Shaun Soto January 31, 2017 at 6:46 pm - Reply

    It’s a fair point, BUT… If you take the amount of crops needed to produce meat and dairy as opposed to eating the crops directly .. You are left with only 10% of the land needed to produce all your vegan food. So that’s 90% less animals dying as a result of growing crops. ALSO.. How many of the farmers growing these crops are vegetarian/vegan themselves? I bet not many. If they were their farming practises and methods would change. Neither of these facts have been taken into account in this guys excuse to consume meat. Now whilst I agree that hunting yourself is far more ethical even though I don’t agree with it personally. What percentage of people kill their own ‘meat’? The fact is 22 million animals die every day in horrific factory farms in the UK alone.

  76. Janis Edwards Cole January 31, 2017 at 7:08 pm - Reply

    I am a vegetarian, simply because i love vegatables instead of meat…

  77. Tony Anthony January 31, 2017 at 7:24 pm - Reply

    So does it make u good to eat}}or bad to eat . ?..

  78. Colleen Carpenter January 31, 2017 at 7:45 pm - Reply

    stupid argument and I am not a veg head

  79. Si Grizzly Main January 31, 2017 at 8:12 pm - Reply

    Jesus christ… what utter nonsense

  80. Peter James Cassidy January 31, 2017 at 8:24 pm - Reply

    Everything has conscious treat it as such

  81. Billy Kure January 31, 2017 at 9:05 pm - Reply

    i just think i don’t eat animals, because i don’t eat meat.

  82. Nemanja Bakalic January 31, 2017 at 10:23 pm - Reply

    What a loud of crap Claudio Bertonatti, …

  83. Míša Dejlová January 31, 2017 at 10:43 pm - Reply

    This guy is the dumbest person on the planet

  84. Elenka Slovenka January 31, 2017 at 11:43 pm - Reply

    Interesting read …

  85. Heath R. Tessmann January 31, 2017 at 11:58 pm - Reply

    what does this guy eat then

  86. Dana Heston February 1, 2017 at 12:04 am - Reply

    Perhaps more humane ways??

  87. Touché Holden February 1, 2017 at 12:19 am - Reply

    If you eat milk products, you’re supporting the killing of many bobby calves also.

  88. Lori Roman February 1, 2017 at 12:24 am - Reply

    It’s all about lessening your foot print. It’s about doing what you can. Its not about being perfect, its about being conscious of what your actions do to another living being. It does make a difference. If you throw a rock into a calm pond, does it not make a ripple? I saw the other day where they are making meat that doesn’t harm any animals, has no diseases and tastes like the real thing in a lab. Perfect in every way. Harms no one… If I have to eat meat, I’m perfectly fine having it made in a test tube if I can spare one animal the torture, abuse, and evil of factory farming. All beings deserve to be free.

  89. Danieka Marshall February 1, 2017 at 12:35 am - Reply

    Lol. He used one farm as an example too

  90. Vivian Brien February 1, 2017 at 1:35 am - Reply

    Seems to me a lot of those crops are grown to feed animals.

  91. Ann Marie Sylvaney February 1, 2017 at 2:44 am - Reply

    That is a weak argument. Not valid.

  92. Thomas Lewis February 1, 2017 at 3:32 am - Reply

    I want a steak right now

  93. Eileen Lois Hittle February 1, 2017 at 3:54 am - Reply

    Do you agree with this article? I have sooooo many rebuttals!

  94. Scott Matznick February 1, 2017 at 4:00 am - Reply

    I’m not educated enough in that field to make a comment.

  95. Eileen Lois Hittle February 1, 2017 at 4:01 am - Reply

    I have done tons of research if you want to learn more about it! Of course I am biased because I ultimately decided to go vegan but I read and watched quite a bit of material before making that decision.

  96. Scott Matznick February 1, 2017 at 4:10 am - Reply

    I suppose my opinion on this is as follows…
    This is necessary
    This is necessary
    Life feeds on life
    Feeds on life
    Feeds on….

    As far as that specific article is saying, I’m not sure how you can deny that the techniques used in corporate farming damage all aspects of the ecosystem, animals included.

  97. Zawadi Moraa February 1, 2017 at 4:34 am - Reply

    Amen.and am thankful to God for his unending Grace for me and my family.

  98. Eileen Lois Hittle February 1, 2017 at 5:20 am - Reply

    (Psst: it only counts if you’ve already read this and didn’t just start googling “why vegan diets are bad for you” just now)

  99. Gail Stevenson February 1, 2017 at 6:35 am - Reply

    This is the most stupid fucking thing I’ve ever read. The majority of the cultivated crops grown on this planet are to feed farm animals that we then eat! I am not a Vegan or even a vegetarian but I fully support a significant reduction in the amount of animal produce we consume. There is well documented, strong evidence of not only the health benefits of eating less meat but the enormous environmental benefits.

  100. Daniel Mancini February 1, 2017 at 6:54 am - Reply

    PS. I miss both of u very much. And love u both very much (nothing sexual; well atleast from my part…i know you wouldnt…SHE wouldnt!)

  101. Chris Tardieu February 1, 2017 at 7:23 am - Reply

    I think this serves to justify the carnivorous desire. I have family who are vegetable farmers in Trinidad and they cater for the lose of crops to animals but the harvest is still profitable.

  102. Laura Richards February 1, 2017 at 8:09 am - Reply

    I don’t even know WHERE to begin with the flaws in this ‘article'(?!) he’s overlooked pretty much everything!

  103. Dijana Yordanova February 1, 2017 at 12:19 pm - Reply

    The point is not to be perfect it’s to reduce suffering and harm. Why kill more when we don’t have to.

  104. Agna Krige February 1, 2017 at 2:43 pm - Reply

    Leo Tolstoy: “Where there are slaughter houses there will be wars.”

  105. Agna Krige February 1, 2017 at 3:09 pm - Reply

    Albert Einstein:- “Nothing will benefit human health and increase chances for survival of life on Earth as much as the evolution to a vegetarian diet.”

  106. Payton Dick February 1, 2017 at 5:02 pm - Reply

    Gimme a break.

  107. Christina Paige February 1, 2017 at 6:37 pm - Reply

    “””Humans eat less than 6 pounds of food per day, a cow eats over 110 pounds a day.

    Cut out the “middle man” and get your nutrients from plants, 20- 26 people could be fed on that same “feed” grown for cattle.

    The logic of this Argentinian fails.”””

  108. Christina Paige February 1, 2017 at 6:38 pm - Reply

    Yea no

  109. Irinej Papuga February 2, 2017 at 7:32 pm - Reply

    pač men je pošteno ubijat živali, sam meso je pa gadno!!!

  110. David Parnell February 15, 2017 at 8:40 am - Reply

    If we aren’t supposed to eat animals, then why are they made of meat???

  111. Bernard Yeo February 28, 2017 at 9:33 am - Reply

    We cannot be too extreme in this case and if we follow what the author’s reasoning, the fact that we are breathing in oxygen and exhaling carbon dioxide is already harming our environment. What we seek is a middle path and compromised way to coexist.

    Like many readers that have commented here, it makes no sense to waste our resources to fuel meat consumption and not forgetting that those animals feel the pains that we are feeling. Maybe the next step we can do is to reduce food wastes and our demand for food even for vegans.

  112. AmByrd Nguyen March 17, 2017 at 6:38 am - Reply

    Good for you

  113. Ashok RajGuru May 23, 2017 at 11:04 am - Reply

    This hypothesis would be good if you hunt wildlife for food. Sadly there is more acreage recovered from forests the create food for domesticated cattle than for human consumption. The feed conversion ratio for beef is around 5.
    If you want to eat meat, do so but don’t come up with a ridiculous argument. In a generation or two its the environmentalists, and not vegans who’ll legislate against meat.

  114. Hillary Vermont May 25, 2017 at 10:05 pm - Reply

    I hope this doesn’t stop anyone from becoming vegan or vegetarian. Grow your own gardens and barter with others that do to avoid this argument.

  115. Cade Foster May 25, 2017 at 11:54 pm - Reply

    That article’s author needs to reevaluate his findings. It is alright to ponder about a circle – where it starts and where it ends – then we go round and round coming to a conclusion – if there’s one – depending on your standing point of view though none of your views would be a conclusive one since the circle encircles the whole world and simply you cannot explain the whole world but you might challenge yours.

  116. ένας μποέμ May 25, 2017 at 11:56 pm - Reply

    And what we have to eat that does not causes animals’ death?

Leave A Comment

You Think You Don’t Kill Animals Because You Don’t Eat Meat? Wrong, Says Argentinian Naturalist

Send this to a friend